dispatches from the new world of work

Cause of Death, ICD

Balance?
Never!

I call it "ICD."
Inherent Centralist Drift.

In response to a Post a while back, there were several Comments that said there must be a Centralization-Decentralization "balance."

Of course!
(Sorta!)

I've devoted my life to the Decentralists Credo.

In short, as I see it, many more (especially large, very large) companies die, or at least, shrivel or cease to lead their industries from too much control, not too little. The biggest reason is an automatic, often invisible, but eventually pronounced drift toward centralization. To get too much centralization, just keep your hands in your pockets. To get or keep a semblance of continued decentralization—fight 24/7, as unfairly as you can.

(It must be "unfair" fighting because the Centralists number among their members 100% of the members of staff departments, otherwise known as "Team 'No.'")

As to "balance"—bad, very bad, word. In short, I cherish tension, despise balance. Let the "balance" emerge, temporarily, from hand-to-hand combat.

(And make sure the Forces of Decentralization and Revenue Maximization are as well armed as the CFO and the "systems guys.")

Tom Peters posted this on 07/06/07.

Comments

As an avowed decentraliser I remember sending a memo to a legendary centralist Finance Officer during my healthcare career with a bit of a radical idea - GOD FORBID!!

I outlined my proposal to decentralise and wrote at the foot of the memo â€˜To save you time in your busy schedule I have prepared your reply. All you need to do is tick one of the boxes below with your answer to my proposal.

Box No 1 No

Box No 2 No

He never replied :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at July 6, 2007 1:04 PM

Balance? Mixed feelings... there has to be a "balance" between tension and balance :). Too much balance: no innovation, comfort, sleepiness, death. Too much tension: loss of focus, no innovation, low productivity, death.

I like your "unfair" bias towards tension though.

Posted by Juan at July 6, 2007 1:08 PM

As a systems guy in Finance (I think I'm getting close to the sweet spot? :o) ) I would just ask that people distinuguish the game from the playing field. If the rules are clear, simple and consistent, there is a chance for flexible, fluid and intelligent behaviour.

If you put your energy into adjusting the rules to fit local conditions or whatever Great Idea you just had, they become so complex that they soak up all the energy and enthusiasm of the players.

So the guardians of the rules (typically the CFO and his systems wonks) do have a positive role to play in marking out the touchlines and calling the fouls.

Posted by Will Ross at July 17, 2007 8:12 AM